Next Distraction: The "War on Women"

Anyone noticed this phrase being dropped into the political lexicon? Here's has-been Angelica Houston talking about the United States going back to "the Dark Ages."

I recently had a Facebook friend post a video about "the GOP's War on Women." Another posted something with a man holding a poster saying "I'm a man and we have to [end the GOP's war on women]."

While I'm used to watching partisans bicker on cable news and used to politicians slam each other for this and that, this one really bothers me. I find it repulsive, because it's so transparent. This has Axelrod, Emmanuel, Pelosi and Reid written all over it. Clearly, the President cannot run on his record. So what better a distraction than to mandate Catholic charities pay for birth control (which they've never done), have Catholics go ballistic, and watch the destruction? It's simple. You get a few moronic politicians like Rick Santorum to talk about social issues and whether states can hypothetically ban birth control. Then you throw in some unfortunate Rush Limbaugh comments, and all of a sudden we have The Gop's War on Women! Puke.

Meanwhile, Rome burns. And no one seems to care.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

Just the whole premise that not giving women free birth control is going to war on them.

I think this reveals a lot about their worldview.

But this is really a natural evolution of the current leftist approach isn't it? I mean not long ago those who disagreed with the current and proposed fiscal and economic policies were "holding the country hostage" and "economic terrorists."

We have one poster here who engages in similar rhetoric frequently and a couple others who come pretty close.

Just the whole premise that not giving women free birth control is going to war on them.

I think this reveals a lot about their worldview.

But this is really a natural evolution of the current leftist approach isn't it? I mean not long ago those who disagreed with the current and proposed fiscal and economic policies were "holding the country hostage" and "economic terrorists."

We have one poster here who engages in similar rhetoric frequently and a couple others who come pretty close.

It's just amazing how it seeps into the mainstream thinking. I had two FB friends (they were ex-husband and wife, actually) post about this on the same day. It's just bouncing around the media echo chamber until it becomes truthy. Worse still, many conservatives like Limbaugh and Santorum end up playing right into it.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

You want fewer abortions? Give free access to birth control. By the way, Ms. Fluke wasn't even testifying about the birth control aspects of birth control. She was discussing the lives it saves from ovarian cancer and the debilitating menstrual pains that it quells. For many reasons, it benefits society to have free access to birth control.

The pro-life side of you should look at the cost benefit and see the abortions averted are more than worth the shared cost of private health insurance premiums.

The pro-human side of you (if it exists) should look at the lives saved from cancer and the suffering eased.

I will, however, thank you for recognizing that state rape by instrument is a war on women.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

For many reasons, it benefits society to have free access to birth control.

The pro-life side of you should look at the cost benefit and see the abortions averted are more than worth the shared cost of private health insurance premiums.

The pro-human side of you (if it exists) should look at the lives saved from cancer and the suffering eased.

The issue here is the mandate and the coercion. If the case is compelling, you and Ms. Fluke ought to have no problem raising funds privately and even convincing insurance companies of the benefits of paying for these things voluntarily. (How much have you given to help women in your community get access to these allegedly critical items?)

But then why do things that way when you can just force people to do what you want.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR

I will, however, thank you for recognizing that state rape by instrument is a war on women.

I won't hold my breath waiting for you to acknowledge that mandating vaccinations is an instrument of war on people. Only on of the types of war on people you advocate.

This really strikes me. You have no room for pragmatism or compromise. You are quite the extremist. If you truly cared about life and wanted to eliminate abortions, you'd support the method that would reduce them the most. Yet, you care more about principles and pennies than lives.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

This really strikes me. You have no room for pragmatism or compromise. You are quite the extremist. If you truly cared about life and wanted to eliminate abortions, you'd support the method that would reduce them the most. Yet, you care more about principles and pennies than lives.

Thanks for sharing your opinions about me and what you think I care about.

Anyone noticed this phrase being dropped into the political lexicon? Here's has-been Angelica Houston talking about the United States going back to "the Dark Ages."

I recently had a Facebook friend post a video about "the GOP's War on Women." Another posted something with a man holding a poster saying "I'm a man and we have to [end the GOP's war on women]."

While I'm used to watching partisans bicker on cable news and used to politicians slam each other for this and that, this one really bothers me. I find it repulsive, because it's so transparent. This has Axelrod, Emmanuel, Pelosi and Reid written all over it. Clearly, the President cannot run on his record. So what better a distraction than to mandate Catholic charities pay for birth control (which they've never done), have Catholics go ballistic, and watch the destruction? It's simple. You get a few moronic politicians like Rick Santorum to talk about social issues and whether states can hypothetically ban birth control. Then you throw in some unfortunate Rush Limbaugh comments, and all of a sudden we have The Gop's War on Women! Puke.

Meanwhile, Rome burns. And no one seems to care.

Here's a few more from the Bush era...

*Compassionate Conservatism... that one is a real eye roller.

*No Child left Behind (ripping off the decades-old slogan of the Children's Defense Fund).

*"The tax relief is for everyone who pays income taxes" (no, Mr President, almost 10% were left out the tax cuts).

*Veteran's Health: Bush: "We must provide the best care for anybody who is willing to put their life in harm’s way". Next day, 160,000 veterans were cut off from health care access.

*Labor: Bush “Our workers are the most productive, the hardest working, the best craftsmen in the world. And I’m here to thank all those who work hard to make a living here in America.”What happened? Bush’s 2003 Budget proposed a 9 percent ($476 million) cut to job training programs and a 2 percent ($8 million) cut to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Similarly, his 2004 budget proposes a $60 million cut to adult job training programs and a total elimination of the Youth Opportunities Grants, which provide job training to younger workers.

*Port Security": Bush June 24, 2002: “We’re working hard to make sure your job is easier, that the ports are safer....". What happened? Bush’s 2003 and 2004 budget provides no money at all for port security grants. The Republican-controlled Congress provided only $250 million for port security grants (35 percent less than authorized). And in August 2002, the President vetoed all $39 million for the Container Security Initiative, which he specifically backed.

*First responders (police, fire etc):
Bush said, March 22, 2002: “We’re dealing with first-time responders to make sure they’ve got what’s needed to be able to respond,” (proposing $3.5 billion in “new” money for first responders). What happened - Bush tried to cut more than $1 billion out of existing grants to local police/fire departments to fund this. And in August of 2002, Bush rejected $150 million for grants to state and local first responders.

*Retirement:
Bush said in August 2002: “We’ve got to do more to protect worker pensions.”
What happened: The new rules change discriminate against older workers in violation of federal law.

*Fiscal Responsibility:
Bush, on On Sept. 16, 2002, Iowa: “One of the ways we’ve got to make sure that we keep our economy strong is to be wise about how we spend our money. If you overspend, it creates a fundamental weakness in the foundation of economic growth. And so I’m working with Congress to make sure they hear the message – the message of fiscal responsibility.”
What happened? Early 2003, Bush proposed a budget that would put the government more than $300 billion into deficit.

*Children's Health:
March, 2001, Atlanta: Bush said "“This is a hospital, but it’s also – it’s a place full of love. And I was most touched by meeting the parents and the kids and the nurses and the docs, all of whom are working hard to save lives.… I’m here to talk about the budget. My job as the President is to submit a budget to the Congress and to set priorities, and one of the priorities that we’ve talked about is making sure the healthcare systems are funded.”
What happened? Bush’s first budget proposed cutting grants to children’s hospitals like the one he visited in Atlanta by 15 percent ($34 million). His 2004 budget additionally proposes to cut 30 percent ($86 million) out of grants to children’s hospitals.

*"Social Security Reform":
Bush Administration: a scheme of privatization that would effectively destroy Social Security.

*Iraq: Chaos
Bush: Stability and democracy.

Not being a supporter of either the Republican or Democratic parties, lets add that Obama, the faux liberal, has continued the prior administration's Orwellian agenda down to the last detail (barring a few token offerings to his base) and expanded it in some cases.

This thread is about how when the left takes the advice of Frank Luntz to heart, the right gets really pissy!

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow

Maybe we should pass a law making it illegal and imprison anyone who does in violation of whatever standard you set.

There's probably a lot of people that "shouldn't be allowed" to call themselves certain things. Progressives are one. Modern liberals another.

We have laws in place already. In most states, if your child has a bacterial infection and you let them die because you won't give them simple antibiotics, then you can go to jail, regardless of what your asinine beliefs are.

Anyone noticed this phrase being dropped into the political lexicon? Here's has-been Angelica Houston talking about the United States going back to "the Dark Ages."

I recently had a Facebook friend post a video about "the GOP's War on Women." Another posted something with a man holding a poster saying "I'm a man and we have to [end the GOP's war on women]."

While I'm used to watching partisans bicker on cable news and used to politicians slam each other for this and that, this one really bothers me. I find it repulsive, because it's so transparent. This has Axelrod, Emmanuel, Pelosi and Reid written all over it. Clearly, the President cannot run on his record. So what better a distraction than to mandate Catholic charities pay for birth control (which they've never done), have Catholics go ballistic, and watch the destruction? It's simple. You get a few moronic politicians like Rick Santorum to talk about social issues and whether states can hypothetically ban birth control. Then you throw in some unfortunate Rush Limbaugh comments, and all of a sudden we have The Gop's War on Women! Puke.

Meanwhile, Rome burns. And no one seems to care.

Why don't you run for the presidency of the U.S.? You seem to know it all!

We have laws in place already. In most states, if your child has a bacterial infection and you let them die because you won't give them simple antibiotics, then you can go to jail, regardless of what your asinine beliefs are.

Zoinks! Wow, you're on a role in jumping from one thing I said to something completely different.

*"The tax relief is for everyone who pays income taxes" (no, Mr President, almost 10% were left out the tax cuts).

*Veteran's Health: Bush: "We must provide the best care for anybody who is willing to put their life in harms way". Next day, 160,000 veterans were cut off from health care access.

*Labor: Bush Our workers are the most productive, the hardest working, the best craftsmen in the world. And Im here to thank all those who work hard to make a living here in America.What happened? Bushs 2003 Budget proposed a 9 percent ($476 million) cut to job training programs and a 2 percent ($8 million) cut to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Similarly, his 2004 budget proposes a $60 million cut to adult job training programs and a total elimination of the Youth Opportunities Grants, which provide job training to younger workers.

*Port Security": Bush June 24, 2002: Were working hard to make sure your job is easier, that the ports are safer....". What happened? Bushs 2003 and 2004 budget provides no money at all for port security grants. The Republican-controlled Congress provided only $250 million for port security grants (35 percent less than authorized). And in August 2002, the President vetoed all $39 million for the Container Security Initiative, which he specifically backed.

*First responders (police, fire etc):
Bush said, March 22, 2002: Were dealing with first-time responders to make sure theyve got whats needed to be able to respond, (proposing $3.5 billion in new money for first responders). What happened - Bush tried to cut more than $1 billion out of existing grants to local police/fire departments to fund this. And in August of 2002, Bush rejected $150 million for grants to state and local first responders.

*Retirement:
Bush said in August 2002: Weve got to do more to protect worker pensions.
What happened: The new rules change discriminate against older workers in violation of federal law.

*Fiscal Responsibility:
Bush, on On Sept. 16, 2002, Iowa: One of the ways weve got to make sure that we keep our economy strong is to be wise about how we spend our money. If you overspend, it creates a fundamental weakness in the foundation of economic growth. And so Im working with Congress to make sure they hear the message the message of fiscal responsibility.
What happened? Early 2003, Bush proposed a budget that would put the government more than $300 billion into deficit.

*Children's Health:
March, 2001, Atlanta: Bush said "This is a hospital, but its also its a place full of love. And I was most touched by meeting the parents and the kids and the nurses and the docs, all of whom are working hard to save lives. Im here to talk about the budget. My job as the President is to submit a budget to the Congress and to set priorities, and one of the priorities that weve talked about is making sure the healthcare systems are funded.
What happened? Bushs first budget proposed cutting grants to childrens hospitals like the one he visited in Atlanta by 15 percent ($34 million). His 2004 budget additionally proposes to cut 30 percent ($86 million) out of grants to childrens hospitals.

*"Social Security Reform":
Bush Administration: a scheme of privatization that would effectively destroy Social Security.

*Iraq: Chaos
Bush: Stability and democracy.

Not being a supporter of either the Republican or Democratic parties, lets add that Obama, the faux liberal, has continued the prior administration's Orwellian agenda down to the last detail (barring a few token offerings to his base) and expanded it in some cases.

This thread is about how when the left takes the advice of Frank Luntz to heart, the right gets really pissy!

You're off topic. I'm talking about a political attack, not government newspeak.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

Why don't you run for the presidency of the U.S.? You seem to know it all!

As someone that's been here a lot long than you (about 12 years), I can tell you this is a place to express opinions and debate. If you don't want to engage in that, then go away. You're taking up space that others could use to actually engage in conversation.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

As someone that's been here a lot long than you (about 12 years), I can tell you this is a place to express opinions and debate. If you don't want to engage in that, then go away. You're taking up space that others could use to actually engage in conversation.

Freedom of speech we fought for that all our lives .Big deal 12 years .How old are you?

This is exactly the kind of disgusting, extremist "stuff" that pollutes our debate. We can't have a conversation about mandating birth control and it's constitutionality, nor on the legality of abortion, nor welfare, nor education, nor war or foreign policy. And it's all because of people like you. You cannot debate issues on the merits. You instead must use all opportunities to slam your political opposition. You're much like the President in this regard. It disgusts and saddens me.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

Anyone noticed this phrase being dropped into the political lexicon? Here's has-been Angelica Houston talking about the United States going back to "the Dark Ages."

I'm sure the media will hold them all responsible for their violent rhetoric and imagery. That and of course they will investigate as to why they are completely full of crap.

Quote:

I recently had a Facebook friend post a video about "the GOP's War on Women." Another posted something with a man holding a poster saying "I'm a man and we have to [end the GOP's war on women]."

It's a stupid campaign wedge issue. The polls show it is hurting Obama more than helping him. Any sort of investigation shows that if you are poor, the government can qualify you for it under MediCal(in California)/Medicare. If you are working poor, etc. then you can go to places like Planned Parenthood and they will treat you and provide you with what you need on a sliding scale based on your income. It isn't free but it has a reasonable co-pay.

Quote:

While I'm used to watching partisans bicker on cable news and used to politicians slam each other for this and that, this one really bothers me. I find it repulsive, because it's so transparent. This has Axelrod, Emmanuel, Pelosi and Reid written all over it. Clearly, the President cannot run on his record. So what better a distraction than to mandate Catholic charities pay for birth control (which they've never done), have Catholics go ballistic, and watch the destruction? It's simple. You get a few moronic politicians like Rick Santorum to talk about social issues and whether states can hypothetically ban birth control. Then you throw in some unfortunate Rush Limbaugh comments, and all of a sudden we have The Gop's War on Women! Puke.

Meanwhile, Rome burns. And no one seems to care.

People do care. The polls show that Obama is basically done. There are the sorts of things that would be the same as cheap shots hoping to start a fight in a sporting event. It clearly reveals Democratic Desperation. The reason it hurts Obama is because it only appeals to the most strident of their core constituency. People on assistance already get birth control. People who are married already have a partner help pay for their birth control or don't need it because they are trying to procreate. People who are attending school or working at any institution they haven't chosen that happens to be in direct opposition to their personal values have birth control provided. Those who have decided to attend or work at an institution which is in direct opposition to their values can get birth control at Planned Parenthood or even at Walmart for a very small co-pay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDW2001

It's just amazing how it seeps into the mainstream thinking. I had two FB friends (they were ex-husband and wife, actually) post about this on the same day. It's just bouncing around the media echo chamber until it becomes truthy. Worse still, many conservatives like Limbaugh and Santorum end up playing right into it.

Clearly your two friends go to the same website to get their little talking points. Like you say it doesn't help if Limbaugh or others like him basically throw a punch when given a cheap shot and ask to be thrown out of the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR

So the bills sweeping many states that mandate institutional rape by instrument are all a Democratic plot to distract people? You are not entitled to your own facts divorced from reality.

Clearly you are divorced from reality. An abortion certainly requires the same sort of instrument be put in the same place and that much more than a picture be taken. Calling a sonogram rape is just an extremist view that you are using to drive yourself into a hateful and violent state.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR

You want fewer abortions? Give free access to birth control. By the way, Ms. Fluke wasn't even testifying about the birth control aspects of birth control. She was discussing the lives it saves from ovarian cancer and the debilitating menstrual pains that it quells. For many reasons, it benefits society to have free access to birth control..

About a third of her testimony covers what you mentioned. The rest of it covered her need for free birth control and claims of $3000 of expenses for three years. The government could give free access to birth control. They do not need to mandate others do their job for them. You are a coward to not address this point because it ruins your hateful wedge issue being used to distract from the fact that if society is at war with a woman because they want her to pay $9 for a month of birth control, then Obama is at war with the entire country due to his energy policies which have caused the current gas prices.

Quote:

The pro-life side of you should look at the cost benefit and see the abortions averted are more than worth the shared cost of private health insurance premiums.

You're not entitled to your own facts. Private doesn't mean public. If the public thinks birth control should be free, public institutions can provide it for free. Please stop being a coward and address that point.

Quote:

The pro-human side of you (if it exists) should look at the lives saved from cancer and the suffering eased.

We understand. Obama is murdering people and causing suffering due to his unwillingness to direct the government instead of private instutitions to provide free birth control.

Quote:

I will, however, thank you for recognizing that state rape by instrument is a war on women.

I'm glad to see your thinking is so easily made strident by bumper sticker reasoning. The Democrats have another sheep to go to the polls for them. You're bleating right on cue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR

This really strikes me. You have no room for pragmatism or compromise. You are quite the extremist. If you truly cared about life and wanted to eliminate abortions, you'd support the method that would reduce them the most. Yet, you care more about principles and pennies than lives.

The opposition are extremists. They are declaring war. They want murder and suffering. That has been stated through all your posts. You sound hateful and dangerous. Clearly you have no problem with putting such people into camps or murdering them since they have been so dehumanized in your thinking. They aren't people in disagreement with you. You've made them the enemy in your mind.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR

Christian Scientists shouldn't be allowed to call themselves that.

I'm sure your guns will put an end to all opposition soon. Then the glorious revolution can finally take full form.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonton

We have laws in place already. In most states, if your child has a bacterial infection and you let them die because you won't give them simple antibiotics, then you can go to jail, regardless of what your asinine beliefs are.

Do we have laws when doctors won't give you those simple antibiotics due to use and abuse by a small minority which means now they treat the majority with contempt and won't treat them? That is pretty much the motus operandi for our society as a whole right now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ1970

Zoinks! Wow, you're on a role in jumping from one thing I said to something completely different.

Looks like we need a thread for you too.

Liberals are busy projecting about bullying because they do so much of it. My prediction is that they will spend the entire fall trying to bully the nation into reelecting Obama. It will be the ugliest and nastiest thing ever.

Let me summarize that for you. Private organization apparently aren't allowed to have or express their private values. However if you ask a private citizen about their private values you are a complete and total asshat. The hypocrisy is too large to bridge. It won't win as an issue. You can't have people declare war on private companies, foundations, universities and hospitals using privacy as a club. Privacy goes both ways.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR

In one nice graphic, the War on People.

The war on people? It must be nice to turn everyone into an enemy. I guess when you murder them you'll feel so good about yourself. Stop engaging in hate speech.